It’s Tuesday, January 22nd, 2013….and for those who think The Anointed One’s second coming would usher in a new era of bipartisan congeniality and harmony….

Paul Ryan Booed at Inauguration

….think again. As contributor Bill Meisen points out, this particular opprobrium was even more poignant as it was started by a sitting U.S. attorney (one of the more politicized appointments in Eric Holder’s Department of Injustice, which is saying something)….

….immediately on the heels of The Obamao uttering yet another hypocritical call for an end to political “absolutism,” partisan rancor, and name-calling.

Now, here’s The Gouge!

If anyone wonders what we thought of the Inaugural festivities, our feelings are once again neatly summarized by the latest installment of Hope n’ Change:

Meet Me at Second and Fifth

In the spirit of Daylight Savings Time, Hope n’ Change Cartoons is proud to announce that today, Inauguration Day, is the official start of “Sanity Savings Time” in which it will always be 5 o’clock for the next four years. Because seriously, who wants to sit through Obama’s Inauguration (or second term) cold sober?!

The Inauguration (derived from the word “auger” which means “a huge screw”) will feature eight real-life “citizen co-chairs” handpicked by the Obama machine, who will tell the world how they’ve benefitted from the president’s policies while their spouses died of cancer caused by Mitt Romney.

Among the eight is a woman who got her job as an autoworker back after Barry gifted the unions with billions of dollars in taxpayer funds, a man who created a windpower business and (surprise!) supports windpower tax credits, and a woman whose brain tumor made it hard for her to get health insurance, but also made her extremely suggestible when she was repeatedly driven to various polling places by Democrat volunteers last November.

Truthfully, Hope n’ Change Cartoons will not be watching any of this.In complete honesty and with no exaggeration, we put Obama’s second term inauguration on par with 9/11…a deliberate attack on our values and an unmitigated disaster for our nation.A sickening, soul-rotting, anti-American hatefest decked out in recycled “Triumph of the Will” regalia.

But it could be worse. At least it’s 5 o’clock.

And though we’ve never watched the show, this snippet from Family Guy bespeaks our emotions as well:

In a related item, someone on the WSJ editorial board, undoubtedly paid to watch what Hope n’ Change accurately described as a “sickening, soul-rotting, anti-American hatefest”, offered these observations:

We the Government

An inaugural address of striking liberal ambition and partisanship.

President Obama’s second inaugural address won’t be remembered for stirring lines, but then its purpose seemed to be more political than inspirational. Mr. Obama was laying down a marker that he has no intention of letting debt or deficits or lagging economic growth slow his plans for activist, expansive government.

Inaugurals usually include calls for national unity and appeals to our founding principles, which is part of their charm. With the election long over, swearing in a President is a moment for celebrating larger national purposes. But Mr. Obama’s speech was notable for invoking the founding principles less to unify than to justify what he called “collective action.” The President borrowed the Constitution’s opening words of “we the people” numerous times, but his main theme was that the people are fundamentally defined through government action, and his government is here to help you.

On that theme, the speech was especially striking for including a specific defense of the federal entitlement programs that everyone knows must be reformed. Mr. Obama cited “Medicare, and Medicaid, and Social Security” by name as “the commitments we make to each other.” Typically, such programmatic specificity is reserved for State of the Union speeches. Mr. Obama almost seemed to be elevating them to Constitutional rights.

Typically, too, inaugural addresses avoid overt partisanship. But after mentioning those entitlements by name, Mr. Obama couldn’t resist saying that those programs “do not make us a nation of takers; they free us to take the risks that make this country great.”

The “takers” line was a clear shot at Mitt Romney’s most famous campaign gaffe. This should have been beneath a Presidential inaugural, but then again it fits Mr. Obama’s post- re-election pattern of continuing to demean and stigmatize those who disagree with him as if the election campaign is still on.

If you think this characterization is unfair, White House communications director Dan Pfeiffer expressed the current mood in the West Wing this way to the Washington Post on Inauguration Day: “There’s a moment of opportunity now that’s important. . . . What’s frustrating is that we don’t have a political system or an opposition party worthy of the opportunity.”

So neither the checks and balances of U.S. democracy nor the Republican Party that controls one branch of Congress is worthy of President Obama’s grand aspirations. Presumably they must bow to his superior moral purposes. It’s important to appreciate how much such contemptuous talk deviates from normal public White House respect for the men and women a President must do political business with.

All of this suggests a second-term President less interested in bipartisan accommodation than in aggressively pursuing the progressive goals on behalf of what he views as a new center-left majority. One of his most passionate moments was even devoted to addressing “climate change,” of all things.

He rarely mentioned the subject in the election campaign. But doing something about global warming is a commandment in the modern liberal catechism, and now Mr. Obama says it will be a major priority in the next four years. He even used the stock liberal description that those who disagree with him on climate change “deny” scientific fact. It’s another example of deliberately stigmatizing his opposition.

We were also struck by what Mr. Obama didn’t say considering the day and its symbolism. He spoke on Martin Luther King Day, a national holiday, yet apart from a fleeting reference he barely mentioned the occasion.

This is odd because there could be no greater symbolism that King’s dream has been realized than the second inauguration of our first black President on the opposite end of the Washington mall on which he gave his most famous speech. It was a missed opportunity to bind up old wounds, but perhaps an intentional one lest Mr. Obama understate the need for even more urgent government action.

Americans want their Presidents to succeed, because they naturally assume that when Presidents do well so will the country. Mr. Obama will thus get a respectful hearing for his agenda, even if he has never been as candid as he was Monday in asserting his liberal ambitions. But if his second term does break down into more partisan gridlock and rancor, let the record show that the President set the tone with his second inaugural.

But come 2016, and the country’s gone to hell in a hand basket, depend upon the MSM to blame Bush!

Next up, courtesy of Balls Cotton, THE consummate politician (which should in NO way be construed as a compliment) offers some words of warning to those who actually believe they have a mandate for change:

Former U.S. President Bill Clinton spoke with top Democratic donors at a private meeting on Saturday where, according to Politico, he warned the group to treat gun control differently than other political issues. “Do not patronize the passionate supporters of your opponents by looking down your nose at them,” Clinton reportedly said. “A lot of these people live in a world very different from the world lived in by the people proposing these things…”

He proceeded to explain how, though polling data is certainly useful for politicians, it doesn’t measure the emotion and enthusiasm associated with an issue. And it’s the passion associated with gun control, Clinton argued, that makes it so delicate.Politico continues:

Clinton dedicated a substantial portion of his 40-minute address before a joint meeting of the Obama National Finance Committee and a group of business leaders to the issue of guns and gun control, saying that it was a test-case for President Barack Obama’s grass-roots movements…

“The way the Obama campaign won Florida, won Ohio, won this election by more than projected was the combination of technology, social media and personal contact,” Clinton said. That’s “the only way that our side will ever be able to even up the votes in the midterms and as these issues come up, really touch people and talk to them about it.”

But he said that he understands the culture that permeates a state like Arkansas — where guns are a longstanding part of local culture. “A lot of these people … all they’ve got is their hunting and their fishing,”he told the Democratic financiers. “Or they’re living in a place where they don’t have much police presence. Or they’ve been listening to this stuff for so long that they believe it all.”

In the opinion of the former president, those who are patting themselves on the back for their “brave” efforts on gun control may not be seeing the full picture.“Do not be self-congratulatory about how brave you [are] for being for this” gun control push, he said. “The only brave people are the people who are going to lose their jobs if they vote with you.”

Which includes about 7 Dimocratic senators from states Romney carried by double digits. And for anyone naive or stupid enough to believe the bullsh*t The Great Prevaricator is attempting to peddle….

….here’s the juice:

For once you can trust him!

And in International News of Note….

Three Americans dead in hostage siege in Algeria

Looking on the brighter side, that’s one less….

….than The Dear Misleader offered up in Benghazi.

In a related headline:

Obama seeks “fuller understanding” of what happened in Algeria siege

Yeah….

Sorry, but does anyone remember….

….The Obamao expressing similar interest in getting to the bottom of Fast & Furious and Benghazi?

Meanwhile, in the midst of the biggest military demobilization since the end of the Second World War, how’s the kinder, gentler branch of the Service spending its time?

Air Force inspections turn up porn, offensive items on its bases

U.S. Air Force: train like you’ll never have to fight!

Hoping to fight sexual assault in its own ranks, the Air Force said Friday a sweep of air base offices worldwide found thousands of suspect materials ranging from pornographic films to a beer bong.It’s not clear what the inspection, and the odd assortment of items it turned up, tells Air Force leaders about the link between the workplace environment and the growing problem of sexual violence. (Nor does anyone care the results tell them nothing!)But it was meant to impress on Air Force commanders that they need to attack the underlying problem of unprofessionalism. (As well as emphasize the triumph of political correctness over combat readiness!)

“We have a significant number of airmen who feel they have to `go along to get along’ by ignoring inappropriate images, workplace comments or other material that makes them uncomfortable. That’s simply not the Air Force we want to be,” the Air Force chief of staff, Gen. Mark Welsh, said in a statement. He ordered the inspections in late November.

….Gen. Larry O. Spencer, the Air Force vice chief of staff, said Friday the inspections of offices and other work spaces at about 100 facilities in December found more than 32,000 items judged to be pornographic, unprofessional or offensive. “This was not a witch hunt,” Spencer said in a telephone interview. It was designed to reinforce the idea that every member of the Air Force should be treated with respect and that sexist attitudes must change, he said.(Including the misogynistic notion women aren’t physically incapable of performing the same tasks of which a 500-lb. man is capable.)The Air Force said the no-notice or short-notice inspections found 631 items judged to be pornographic, including magazines, calendars, photos and videos.

They also turned up 3,987 items deemed unprofessional. Examples: a pubic hair in an office logbook, a beer bong and World War II-era airplane nose art depicting a fully clothed but “promiscuous” woman, according to an Air Force document listing all the items.

How ever did we defeat Facism and Communism with such neanderthals?!?

Among 27,598 items categorized by commanders as “offensive”: a postcard depicting women in bikinis, lewd cartoons, a copy of the Air Times newspaper’s “Hot Shots 2013″ calendar with women in “provocative” poses, a picture of professional football player Tom Brady shirtless (It’s a good thing HE’S not going to the Super Bowl!) , a Confederate flag and a poster of Osama bin Laden.

Asked what this tells him about a relationship between problematic workplace items and the effort to combat sexual abuse, Spencer said it’s a mixed picture and that the goal is to ensure professionalism in the workplace.(In other words, he hasn’t the slightest clue!)“Most of the items that were found some might find offensive (but) weren’t in the category of vulgarity or pornography, although there was some of that out there and those were taken care of,” he said, adding that he’s not sure there is a clear link between offensive materials in the workplace and the problem of sexual assault.

“Whether offensive material is directly connected to someone creating a sexual assault or being involved in sexual assault, I can’t draw that line directly,” Spencer said. “But I think it all starts with the culture that we want to have out there, and that is a professional environment and that everybody is treated with respect.”

All of which, of course, has NOTHING to do with winning wars, but EVERYTHING to do with political correctness. Asked what these inspections said about the Air Farce’s combat readiness, The Daily Gouge responded, “Sounds like they’re preparing for “flight”….

….not “fight”.

And in today’s Money Quote, courtesy of the WSJ, John Gray, professor emeritus at the London School of Economics, writes in the January 2nd edition of the Times Literary Supplement regarding a reality Liberals refuse to recognize:

“One of the features that distinguished Bolshevism from Tsarism was the insistence of Lenin and his followers on the need for a complete overhaul of society. Old-fashioned despots may modernize in piecemeal fashion if doing so seems necessary to maintain their power, but they do not aim at remaking society on a new model, still less at fashioning a new type of humanity. Communist regimes engaged in mass killing in order to achieve these transformations, and paradoxically it is this essentially totalitarian ambition that has appealed to liberals. Here as elsewhere, the commonplace distinction between utopianism and meliorism is less than fundamental. In its predominant forms, liberalism has been in recent times a version of the religion of humanity, and with rare exceptions— [Bertrand] Russell is one of the few that come to mind—liberals have seen the Communist experiment as a hyperbolic expression of their own project of improvement; if the experiment failed, its casualties were incurred for the sake of a progressive cause. To think otherwise—to admit the possibility that the millions who were judged to be less than fully human suffered and died for nothing—would be to question the idea that history is a story of continuing human advance, which for liberals today is an article of faith. That is why, despite all evidence to the contrary, so many of them continue to deny Communism’s clear affinities with Fascism. Blindness to the true nature of Communism is an inability to accept that radical evil can come from the pursuit of progress.“

And since we’re on the subject of Liberal hypocrisy, this just in from Washington State:

Mission told not to feed the homeless in Seattle city parks

The Bread of Life Mission, which has served the homeless community in Pioneer Square for more than 70 years, said the city has directed them to stop feeding the hungry in downtown parks. On the third Saturday of every month for the past three years, volunteers for the mission have handed out meals at places such as City Hall Park. The offering was in addition to the three meals a day they serve inside their building at 97 South Main Street. “It was a service we were offering free of charge to be a blessing to the homeless,” said Executive Director Willie Parish, Jr. “All we were doing was just a continuation of what we do on a daily basis.”

In December, however, Parish said Seattle police told them they were no longer allowed to serve food at the park. City officials say the restriction is nothing new, and that Bread of Life simply operated in the park for three years without being caught or reported.David Takami with the Seattle Human Services Department said the city does not allow groups of people to feed the homeless outdoors without approval. “This has happened in the past where there are a lot of meals served in a short period of time on the same day,” he said. “It’s a little chaotic and it can also lead to wasted food.”

Takami said those wishing to feed the homeless need to coordinate with the Operation: Sack Lunch program, which serves up to 300 people a day at the city’s outdoor meal site, located under the I-5 bridge at 6th Avenue and Columbia Street. By requiring that all food be served at the site, Takami said the city can control the nutritional value of what the homeless eat and can prevent litter from being left behind at parks after meals.

He said the controlled environment is also safer for volunteers. “For example, there was one group of middle school students who, out of the goodness of their hearts, wanted to serve meals to homeless people and we were concerned […] because of possible safety issues,” Takami said.

Nevertheless, Bread of Life is upset about the restriction and hopes to continue serving meals to homeless individuals who do not come into their shelter. “We love to do it, we want to continue doing it,” Parish said.

After all, we wouldn’t want the homeless consuming the same diet as America’s poor:

On the Lighter Side….

Turning to the Sports Section, whooda thunk….

Reports: Falcons fan stabbed in neck by 49’ers fan

….Ray Lewis was pulling for San Francisco?!?

And in another titillating tale ripped from the pages of The Crime Blotter, we learn of a….

Minnesota lawyer who had affair with client bills her for time spent having sex

A Minnesota lawyer is suspended indefinitely after having an affair with a client and then billing her for the time spent having sex, TwinCities.com reported. Thomas P. Lowe, 58, of Eagan, Minn., who is married, had an affair with a woman he was representing in a divorce case, according to the website.

Lowe reportedly knew the client for many years, and agreed in August 2011 to represent her in her divorce case. The two began an affair one month later. The website reports that at several times, Lowe billed the woman for legal services rendered while the two were having sex — calling the time spent together a “meeting” or memo draft.

Lowe will not have a chance for for reinstatement for at least a year and three months, according to the website.

A slap on the wrist compared to the five years Der Schlickmeister got for perjury!

Finally, we’ll call it a day with a follow-up on an earlier item detailing death by subway:

NYC subway shove suspect reportedly says she was having a bad day

Yeah….not as bad as the poor unfortunate she pushed. It’s at least good to know, charged with homicide, she’s having fun now!